• Mihies@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    No, it’s different with hydrogen. If you want green hydrogen, you’ll waste at least 50% of energy. Then there are storage and flammability etc. We have everything we need for using hydrogen today, but somehow it is not used besides minor experiments.

    • jagermo@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Yeah, but does energy waste matter if the other option is that you turn wind or solar input off? It should not run during high peak, of course, but if there is more energy in the grid than it uses? Turn it into hydrogen.

      And storage, strangely that safety topic never gets raised with nuclear. If we can build safe nuclear, we can build safe hydrogen storage.

      • Mihies@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        52 minutes ago

        True, if we have huge surplus of renewables, then the cost doesn’t matter that much.

        As per storage. Nuclear is far less problematic to handle in many aspects. Hydrogen is notoriously hard to store and if we go at scale, there would be massive amounts of hydrogen stored everywhere. A tiny spark away of a huge bomb.

      • Soggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        If we can build safe nuclear, we can build safe hydrogen storage.

        They’re facing entirely different problems.